Monday, April 27, 2009

Unprecedented in our nations recent history, the silent liberty loving majority has begun to wake up to the "long train of abuses" being perpetrated against them by the current ruling classes. Unfortunately, many in the leadership of the many grass-roots organizations attempting to marshal the awaking body politic have asserted that they should not be politically active nor partisan- motivated. God love the Birchers, but for the last 50+ years they have attempted that exact same non-political, educational effort to no avail…for here we are watching as the Congress and the White House rip our Constitution to shreds, destroying our Republic in the process, while we stand by being non-political and non-partisan. What have the current incumbent bailout voters to fear so long as we remain non-political? They can simply wait out this current gale of anger from us and then go back to their nefarious ways when we go back to sleep. The only thing they understand, like so many tyrants before them, is political force. When we start replacing them with Constitutional Conservatives, in large numbers, THEN we will certainly have their attention.

So how do we keep these new patriots awake and in the fight? I guarantee you it’s not through being non-political and merely an educational movement. People do not stay up all night making signs to hang from freeway overpasses nor post blogs all over the net for "educational" efforts. They do not give money in record amounts, like they did for Ron Paul, for efforts that will not result in real change. They do not get back involved in their parties to rid them of the socialists (Democrats) and corporatists (Republicans) that have taken them over by staying neutral. And they do not march in the streets with the same fire and righteous anger as they did on April 15th 2009 when they are repeatedly told that their fight is going to be non-political, neutral and therefore irrelevant. However, we will do and have done all of those things for Constitutional Conservative Candidates that we KNOW will stand up and fight for US!

My fellow Americans and Oklahomans, there are Constitutional Conservative Candidates stepping forward to fight for us all over this country and they have the establishment in both major parties running scared. As a result you can bet that they will not get any financial aid or volunteer support from their respective party establishments. Furthermore, real Constitutional Conservative Candidates will refuse to solicit money from lobbyists or party officials known to be supporting bailout voters. Thus, as much as the Constitutional Conservatives are riding to our aid, we must ride to theirs and support them with donations and volunteerism.

Socialism and Corporatism are taking over our government, our Republic is failing, the Constitution is being ignored and the American birthright of freedom is being sold out by the very people sworn to protect it. The time for neutrality and sunshine patriotism is over. It’s time to fight with your activism and your money and your votes; or watch your country die. It’s time to hold the representatives we elected accountable by replacing them with Constitutional Conservative Candidates from within our ranks. It is time to WAKE UP, and fight for liberty!

The consequences of continued non-political efforts and neutrality are too heinous to even consider. But consider them we must. When the Roman Republic fell to imperialism from within itself, the western world did not know freedom again until 1776. For 1700+ years’ freedom and individual liberties were ignored by the great western powers of the world. If we let freedom and liberty fail on our watch, how long will it be, how many generations will pass, before the next George Washington or Thomas Jefferson are born?

We must fight now or freedom will fail and our children will wake up slaves in the land our fathers founded. FOR LIBERTY!

Today our President saw fit to fire the CEO of a major publicly traded U.S. corporation. Such power usually resides only in the hands of a company’s stockholders or a fascist government. And what of GM’s stockholders, have they no say in who will run their company?

The President believes that he has this power because GM accepted our bailout money. But then again so has the State of Oklahoma…are we to be next? Has your state accepted the Federal Government's bailout money as well? When our Governors or legislatures refuses to toe- the-line of the President’s plans are they to be so easily “asked” to step down as well? In the last six months, we have watched our congress vote for socialism and involuntary servitude. We have watched them pass ex post facto laws and bills of attainder, both of which are strictly forbidden by the Constitution. Now we have watched our President usurp the legitimate voice of stockholders like you and take us on the first steps to fascism while targeting private citizens for speaking out against these tyrannies.

What other liberties will you allow them to take before you answer my call to come out and defend yourselves? Our republic is on its deathbed and the President and the Congress are ripping our constitution apart and the freedom handed down to us by our ancestors is about to fail. We have but one chance to avert this disaster…we must reseat a new Congress filled with Constitutional Conservatives, regardless of party, in 2010 and 2012.

It will take our combined resources to get this message out on every media outlet that will carry it. It will take your donations to overcome the entrenched incumbents and their lobbyist money to get Constitutional Conservatives elected in this next cycle. Your freedom must be defended with your money and your blood and with your lives if necessary. But I will not ask of you that which I will not give. Therefore, I will take the last of my campaign seed money and buy ads on the radio to inform as many Oklahomans as possible about this plan to retake our congress and restore our republic. If we don’t fight back now we will wake up slaves in the land our fathers settled.

Please donate what you can to this effort now, before the cause of freedom asks more from you than just money.www.rjharris2010.com

Many of you have heard Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and other conservative talkers explain, at length, what is wrong with our country today. It is easy and depressing to be caught up in what is wrong…and honestly, we all know what is wrong. Talking about what is wrong makes for sensational radio, but the 65trillion dollar question is, “what are we—the average citizens of the country—going to do about it”?

The answer is as simple as it is enormous, but no more enormous than our founders taking on the world’s greatest superpower of their age to give us all freedom! We must take on the world’s most powerful body, the United States Congress and we must elect Constitutional Conservative Candidates to take back our government. That is how we fire the second shot heard round the world!

As massive as that seems the mood in this country among the people is finally ripe enough to attempt such a grand revolution. And what really breaks the spell of the problems magnitude is just saying what we have to do…OUT LOUD!!! You must find Constitutional Conservative candidates, no matter where they are running and DONATE TO THEM RIGHT NOW! We are arrayed against the most powerful and entrenched bureaucracy the world has ever seen. Its financial resources are near endless and its will to oppress, staggering. If you good patriots will not stand up for leaders like Myself and Peter Schiff and Rand Paul, then we will be crushed. But with your help and support, both voluntary and financial, WE CAN WIN!!!

PATRIOTS OF THE OLD REPUBLIC, OUR FOREFATHERS CALL YOU, ONCE MORE INTO THE BREACH FOR YOUR FREEDOM, YOUR STATE SOVEREIGNTY, AND FOR YOUR LIBERTY!!!!

Human beings are not a virus upon the planet. We are its rightful caretakers. If you believe in God, you believe that this earth was a gift to us and we are its stewards. If you do not believe in God then consider the massive effort the Universe has undertaken to provide us with a living planet. Either way, we owe a debt of care to the planet we share together. I have no right to poison the air you must breathe and you have no right to soil the water I must drink. The destruction of the Earth would destroy all life, liberty, and property and therefore cannot be countenanced by any government whose charge it is to protect those very things.

I will either support or author a bill to eliminate the Federal Department of Education. Washington does not know what is best for Oklahoma students; Oklahomans know what is best for their students.

The Constitution does not establish a right to Education guaranteed by the Federal Government. However, the Tenth Amendment reserves to the States those powers not delegated to the Federal Government. The individual States then may choose on their own to fund education programs if their citizens demand it of them. States should use issues like this one to create a market of Sovereigns from which citizens may choose the best for them. Some states will lean towards free market solutions, others will rely upon socialist solutions, and the people can choose which ones are best by where they choose to live.

During the decades leading up to the American Revolution, the major European powers of that age jousted for the rights to the spoils of the new world. The American Colonials were little more than pawns to be sacrificed back and forth for minor gains for their mother countries. Often, after great hardship and bloodshed, the European powers would sign treaties returning things to pre-conflict states, which meant that what had been won or lost was irrelevant and the death and sacrifice of the colonial militias for king and country was all in vain. President George Washington was an officer in the colonial militia and he was all too familiar with the cavalier way that European Monarchs would so recklessly sacrifice Americans as so much cannon fodder. It should come then as little surprise to learn that he warned us against becoming involved in European affairs “foreign to our concerns.” (George Washington’s farewell address)

Following President Washington’s advice, President Adams successfully kept us out of war in Europe when so many were calling for intervention. President Jefferson reiterated America’s non-interventionist policy by asserting in his inauguration address, “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." James Madison also followed suit on Washington’s non-intervention advice and kept the United States out of the Napoleonic Wars. James Monroe was so committed to Washingtonian non-interventionism that he became famous for it by articulating the same principles in what came to be known as the “Monroe Doctrine.” Five out of the first five Presidents, men that bear the title founding fathers as much or more than anyone else, all were committed to the principles of non-interventionism. Why was non-interventionism so important to our first five presidents? Because they knew from their colonial experiences that entangling, foreign alliances would ultimately have to be redeemed with American blood and treasure. And when the European powers were done pounding on one another, and us, there would be nothing to show for the sacrifice.

In the last 60 years, more Americans Soldiers have died policing the world than from all other industrialized nations combined. What would Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and Monroe have to say about that? But what does all this have to do with our National Sovereignty? Everything! Since the early 1900s we have increasingly involved ourselves in the business of others. We have joined international pacts and unions and each time we do we sacrifice more of our sovereignty and prosperity. International bodies, like the UN are allowed to take command of our soldiers and dictate to us where and when we may come and go. Now they want to force member nations to purchase “carbon credits” to pay for their “pollution” and they do this with willing accomplices from within our own country and current government. The time is fast approaching when US Military forces will scarcely be allowed outside the country without a blue helmet on. As you know by now I am all for keeping our Army and Militia right here at home by our own choosing, but our Navy and Marine Corps should answer to no one save the President and they come and go at his pleasure, not the Secretary General’s.

Most recently, our various borders are coming under attack by those who want to build super highways connecting all of North America, never mind that they have to cut this country up to do it. Some believe that our currency is purposefully being debased to make way for a new North American Currency modeled on the Euro. As much as I would like to believe that these things won’t happen, time and experience have taught me otherwise. Folk, the number of dead for the sake of the preservation of this country and our sovereignty is measured in the millions. We should not give it all away so recklessly.

Equally important to our National Sovereignty is our State Sovereignty. The Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” This means, notwithstanding the short list of restrictions on the States found in Article I §§ 9 and 10, that the States have always retained their sovereignty. Non-sovereigns are not treated like sovereigns. Ratification of a binding agreement like the Constitution requires the power of a sovereign. And why would a National Government bind itself to non-sovereigns? The answer is that it would not. States have the authority to entreat with the United States Government and the US Government with other sovereigns on behalf of the states. States retain the right to govern themselves and to adjudicate disputes among their citizens. States may retain militias, armed citizens, who but a sovereign can keep soldiers under arms? States retain limited sovereign immunity. In fact, the Eleventh Amendment was hastily passed in 1795 because of an infringement into state sovereignty and sovereign immunity.

Unfortunately, the federal government has spent the last 70 years attempting to take our state sovereignty away from us one piece at a time. It all began with the Congressional abuse of the Commerce Clause wherein the Congress is given near plenary power to regulate commerce among the several states. Since the last Great Depression the federal government has used entitlement programs and over-taxation to hold control over states not given to it by the Constitution. Numerous Supreme Court Cases have articulated that the federal government may not tell the state legislatures or executives what to do. However, it can coerce behavior by withholding money upon which the states have become dependent. Against this rising tide of socialism and stimulus packages, we must resist the temptation to trade more of our sovereignty for “thirty pieces of silver” from the federal government.

Tribal sovereignty is also established and recognized by the Constitution. Article I and II establish the power of the Congress and the President to treaty with the Indian Tribes. Treaties require two-thirds concurrence from the Senate and once ratified they become part of the established law. As was previously mentioned, sovereigns do not treaty with non-sovereigns. For the last two hundred plus years, the federal government has entered into hundreds of treaties with the Indian Tribes of North America often agreeing to allow them to keep their land and sovereignty in return for peaceful cohabitation with the American emigrants into the Western States. Eventually, the tide of American emigrants to the West began to stem and Native territorial boundaries and reservations began to stabilize. Today, tribal governments stretch from Maine to Hawaii and all operate with the same sovereignty as the states, if not the same representation.

As a Congressperson from Oklahoma’s 4th District, I pledge to do all that I can do defend the liberty of the individual and the sovereignty of our Nation, State, and Tribes. However, these bodies must begin to protect their sovereignty and stop giving it away for government handouts and entangling alliances with foreign sovereigns. Of course, this issue is tied directly to the elimination of federal over-taxation because until we stop the overflow of money to the federal government, the states are going to be motivated to continue trading their sovereignty for federal money. Read my position on taxation to see how I intend to address that issue.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Congress should stop delegating its power and authority and the Supreme Court should return to its original precedent of the Non-Delegation Doctrine.

Congress is intended to be held politically accountable for its actions. Often, the Supreme Court has refused to strike down bad legislation because it opined that punishing bad legislation is a job reserved to the people at the ballot box. The problem with the demise of the Non-Delegation Doctrine is that when Congress delegates its power, the people lose their ability to hold it accountable because the blame for the effects of a bad statute can almost always be laid at the feet of the federal bureaucracy that executed the statute; not the passage of the statute itself. Of course this evolution of the way to Congress governs is quite agreeable to Congresspersons who do not want to be held responsible for trampling the Constitution, abridging liberties, or raising taxes. When citizens rail against the out-of-control tax code or the heavy hand of the Internal Revenue Service, many Congresspersons feign ignorance claiming outrage belongs to the IRS as the culprit while begging off the responsibility they themselves were intended to bear. Congress could reign in abuses committed by renegade Federal Agencies in this very session if it was committed to doing so rather than merely pointing fingers and deflecting blame. Congressional delegation of its powers and authorities is the foremost cause of the infringements upon our liberties over time.

The 2nd Amendment: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” Second Amendment, US Constitution.

A well-regulated militia, comprised of the armed people/citizens, is not necessary for the defense of a Monarchy, Tyranny, or Oligarchy. Those forms of government require standing armies loyal to a king, a tyrant, and an aristocracy to provide their security and historically they receive the opposite of security from an armed populace. Herein lays one of the key differences between our Republic and the other sovereigns of the world. Our founders acknowledged that the government of a free people holds power at the pleasure and discretion of the armed people and not the armed king. Our Supreme Court has acknowledged this interpretation as recently as 2007. In the DC v. Heller case, Justice Scalia articulated for the majority opinion that the reason for a well-regulated militia (armed people) was that “when able bodied men of a nation are trained in arms and organized, they are better able to resist tyranny.” DC v. Heller page 27 (quoting The Federalist No. 29, pp. 226, 227 (B. Wright ed.1961) (A. Hamilton) found on); http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/07-2901.pdf.

Thus, august legal scholars, from Hamilton to Scalia and the current Supreme Court, agree that an armed population is the check and balance against an oppressive government. So, when the federal, state, and local governments attempt to disarm us, realize that they know the purpose of the Second Amendment as well as we do, and they realize that it is THE impediment to their absolute rule over us all. Considering all of this, do you really believe that our disarmament is for “public safety”, or is it just another attempt to sell us false security in place of our freedom? I say false security because mad gunmen do not attack police stations; they attack un-armed students and civilians. Clearly, security is to be found in being armed.

However, all of this does not mean that we armed citizens can break out our guns and march on Washington tomorrow, although I really do understand that sentiment given the socialism that has been pouring out of there lately. The militia, (National Guard) belongs to their respective states unless, and until, Congress calls them forth to “execute the laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections, and repel Invasions.” US Constitution Article I § 8. A disparate group of armed, disgruntled citizens attempting to force redress is the textbook definition of an Insurrection, which the Congress has the authority to suppress. If you do not believe accept my position on this point, Google Daniel Shay. Contrastingly, legitimate state governments, protecting their citizens from federal abuses of power, is a Supreme Court recognized use of the militia. Therefore, wielding the awesome power of the Second Amendment against the federal government falls to the discretion of our state governments; keeping the state governments in line falls directly on the armed citizens of the individual states.

Additionally from DC v. Heller, the majority held that the reasons given for the right to bear arms, those being the necessity of a well regulated militia and the security of a free state, are not exhaustive. The right to bear arms is an individual right and is situated among a list of individual rights known as the Bill of Rights. The first Ten Amendments have long been referred to this way and for liberal scholars to say otherwise is more than just a little disingenuous and revisionist. Given then the importance of the Second Amendment in securing for us the other Nine, I can sum up my position on this issue by quoting the late, great, Charlton Heston, “FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS”!

I am against all forms of abortion save to protect the life and health of the mother.

I have often wondered, ‘how could our founders have ever countenanced slavery’? I believe that the same question will be asked about us by some future generation as it applies to abortion. A slave named Dred Scott brought the first Supreme Court challenge against the practice of slavery. However, Chief Justice Marshall, writing for the majority, denied Scott his day in court by holding that Scott was not a person. Many Southern Apologists used the same argument quite often to justify the ownership and degradation of persons based solely on their race. Tyrants and despots have often justified the genocide of their enemies by convincing their soldiers and their populations of the un-humanity of their victims. Today, supporters of abortion refuse to recognize the humanity or personhood of the unborn and insist upon referring to these children as “fetuses.” There seems to be a pattern here in this behavior and I respond to it with this analogy. If NASA found a sealed jar on Mars tomorrow, that contained a Human Embryo, it would not just announce that it had discovered life on Mars, but that it had discovered Human life on Mars. The question then becomes, ‘when does that human life become a person for Constitutional purposes’?

Theologically, many from the Judeo-Christian faith would argue that immortal life for Adam began when God imparted into him the “Breath of Life.” Scientifically, there is a moment in the development of the child, which is analogous to that moment for Adam, and that moment is referred to by scientists as the quickening. The quickening occurs when the baby begins to move about in the womb on his/her own accord. This activity signals the activation of a brain and functioning nervous system. I personally believe that this is the moment a human life becomes a person; however, I could be wrong. Rather than be responsible for the murder of millions if I was, I cannot therefore countenance abortion of any kind save those that must be performed to save the life of the mother…and even then, the mother may chose to die that her child might live.

Civilized human beings need to understand that when they engage in sexual activity they might produce children. Yes indeed, there may be extenuating circumstances where the woman was raped and forcing her to have the child seems rather cold to almost everyone…save the innocent life about to be killed. Our society, through its Constitution and other founding documents, establishes the fundamental Right to Life. The Declaration of Independence refers to this right as inalienable and endowed by the Creator. The Constitution requires that no person be denied this right except by due process of law. What then is the unborn child guilty of to justify the use of any process to deprive him/her of it?

The Supreme Court has found among the totality of the Constitution, and the Ninth Amendment, the fundamental right to privacy, and within that right, they have found the right to abortion. Herein lays the real conflict of our age, the inalienable and enumerated, fundamental right to life of the unborn vs. the un-enumerated and insinuated fundamental right to an abortion by the usually negligent and sometimes unfortunate. If the only children we allowed to be disposed of where those conceived by rape or incest, the Creator, Karma, Fate, and the Universe may just forgive our murders. Sadly, we all know that the lions-share of these exposures are committed in the name of convenience and not sympathy.

After giving up a profitable Career in the Federal Aviation Administration to complete my undergraduate and legal degrees, my wife accidentally became pregnant…with twins and we were already supporting three children. (We did not know it was twins when the home test first came back positive.) I had uprooted my family and moved “mountains” to accommodate these goals and for the briefest of moments the question was barely given breath, ‘what should we do.’ I said to my wife that I would give up my law school dreams and return to the FAA, but I would not be able to live with either of us if we allowed ourselves a quite little murder for convenience. When I said this out-loud, the Destroyer’s lie was exposed and my wife realized there was but one true option and we chose life. We found a way to make room for two more little miracles and I am still in Law School. My friends…don’t believe the lies of the moment and convince yourselves that it is ever “okay” to kill your children.

The United States should be prepared to respond decisively against any Sovereign that would dare to attack even a single US Citizen or his/her property. However, we can limit our exposure to such aggression by ending our illegal and un-affordable empire and returning our Army and Militia back to the United States. Once so returned, attacks by foreign sovereigns against our Navy, Embassies, Territories, Citizens, or their property are acts of war and should be dealt with as such. All US Government sponsored foreign aid should end IMMEDIATELY; save for reparations the United States may be legally or morally obligated to pay. Foreign disaster relief should be funded by private donations used to pay for the expenses of the Navy/Air Guard Air Lift in conducting such humanitarian operations.

A foreign Sovereign that kills or has a hand in killing even a single American has committed an act of war upon us all. A foreign Sovereign that confiscates or damages the property of even one of us, or our government, has also committed an act of war against us all. Such actions should be dealt with decisively. Lesser resolve would invite rogue nations to engage us at their leisure. When war is forced upon us, then it should be declared and the raising and deployment of our Army and Air Force (from the National Guard) would be just and Constitutional.

However, I agree with Ron Paul completely that we are policing an un-constitutional and illegal empire around the world. I agree with him that we are paying for bases around the world that we should not even have and cannot afford. I agree with him that our Army and Militia should immediately be returned to us. And, I agree that our military is being operated well outside its constitutional limitations. I only disagree with him in that, when we are attacked, regardless of where it is, and regardless of whether or not our soldiers should have been in the region, we have the full right to respond…well beyond in kind. Of course, there is much wisdom in his argument that if we did not have this illegal empire then we would not be the target of many attacks.

Lastly, the Constitution does not allow the Congress to spend taxpayer money on emergency foreign humanitarian aid. Such expenditures have nothing to do with providing for the common Defense or the general Welfare. However, the American People are very generous and if they were allowed to keep more of their income, because it was not being forcibly taken from them through over taxation, then they could donate—even more than they already do—to efforts that would reimburse the United States for the use of its hardware and supplies on humanitarian missions around the world. By way of this donation method, the people of the United States could then sanction the use of the Navy/Air Guard Air Lift for humanitarian aid or refuse to do so. If the donations were not available then no aid would be provided. Comparatively, taxes should only ever be raised for the "common defense" because taxes are compulsory. Compulsory donation is not aid, it is theft.

Congress must declare war against a Foreign Sovereign or return our Militia and Army to us immediately. The job of defending us from terrorism and piracy rightfully belongs to the Navy and does not require a formal declaration of War. To this end, resources for the Navy and Marine Corps should be dramatically increased immediately. Clearly our citizens and their property have become targets around the world and our President has all the Constitutional authority he/she needs to administer their common defense unless and or until the Congress reduces the funding for the Navy to the point that it is no longer able to execute the President’s plan for that defense.

The Constitution refers to what we call “National Defense” as “the common defense.” This more precise reading establishes the governments charge to protect its Citizens, and their property, wherever they are in the world. There are many ways to protect our citizens, the greatest of which is the deployment of military forces. For this purpose, the President has at his/her disposal—at all times—the Navy and Marine CORPS (part of the Navy). The size of these military branches are controlled by the funding Congress authorizes for them and the Congressional authority to perpetually fund them is found in Article I § 8. These forces are uniquely suited to defend us from international terrorism and piracy and the President can use them as he/she sees fit. If the people do not like how he uses them, then they can elect a new President in the next election. If the Congress does not like how he/she is using them, Congress can reduce their funding to the point that they become ineffective as a fighting force.

I am very careful to leave out the Army, National Guard, and the Air Force (Constitutionally part of the Army) from the list of Military Forces that the President has access to at all times. True enough, the President is the Commander and Chief of all of these forces as well; however, under Article I § 8 the Congress must raise and support an Army before the President can have access to it. Moreover, the Congress may only appropriate money for that purpose for two years. Because of the “Cold War”, the Congress has appropriated Money to supply the President with a “Standing Army” every two years since the end of World War II. Few would attempt to argue that the Cold War continues. Why then is the Congress still appropriating Money for a Standing Army when the Constitution forbids this perpetual appropriation? While the Constitution does not explicitly state that the Army must only be raised in time of declared war, its position in the paragraph, right after the power to declare war, and the time limitation on the appropriation, heavily insinuates that a declaration of war is needed to raise an army or call forth the Militia.

Reading Article I § 8 in its entirety and context, it is clear to me that the Navy, Army, and Militia are three distinct entities. This distinction is important because, unlike standing armies, the Congress is allowed to provide for the Militia (National Guard) perpetually. As with standing armies though, the President does not have access to the Militia at all times because Article I § 8 requires Congress to “call forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions…” How is it then that the National Guard is being deployed around the world to fight terrorism or to secure our “National Interests” since fighting terrorism should be the job of the Navy without a formal Declaration of War and of the Army with one and in either case has nothing to do with suppressing an insurrection or repelling an invasion? This point is critical because according to one august member (Ron Paul) of the same Congress that voted to extend to the President the authority to use force to defend us from terrorism (a resolution I have already argued was constitutionally unnecessary) there has been no formal declaration of war against any Sovereign supporting terrorism, there has been no insurrection to suppress, nor invasion to repel. An attack or raid is not an invasion although it is an act of war if committed by a foreign sovereign and should be responded to with a formal declaration.

Furthermore, since there is supposed to be no other standing army besides the Militia, the considerable appropriations for the Army and Air Force should be redirected to the National Guard—not reduced—and the active duty personnel should be redirected to their state militias to train and discipline them. Historically, the only active duty Army, outside of a declared war, was the West Point Cadets and Staff, and an elite cadre of Commissioned and Non-Commissioned Offers that were used to train and discipline the Militia in accordance with the letter of Article I § 8 which authorizes the Congress to do exactly that. The active duty divisions should be redirected to the states wherein they reside and become part of their Militia until they are called up for a declared war. We could provide ten times the combat capability with the same expenditure in capital if we were abiding by the Constitution on this issue.

And what, pray tell, should we do with all that combat power if they are not to be deployed for a war immediately. First, I will address that question in more detail under Foreign Policy. Second, the Constitution requires that these forces be prepared to repel an invasion or suppress an insurrection. Given the size of our country, these forces then must be considerable. Lastly, we do have thousands of miles of borders to protect and currently the flood of illegal immigrants across them could and should be argued as the very definition of the invasion that the Constitution requires the Militia to defend us from. Brigade Combat Teams, and their support elements, from all the States could take turns on one-year tours defending our borders. Ranges and maneuver sites could be co-located so as to provide our troops with rigorous and meaningful training when not on guard duty. Additionally, there are always natural disasters in need of rapid response. In other words, there is plenty for our Militia to do right here at home unless and until a war is declared by the Congress against a Foreign Sovereign…

The US Congress must begin to repeal the un-constitutional Federal Reserve Act, and the Coinage Act of 1965, and reclaim from the Federal Reserve— which is a private bank —the Congress’ Power of creating Money and Credit.

Article I § 8 of the US Constitution extends to the Congress the power and benefit to coin and borrow money and to regulate the value of the money so coined and the coin of foreign sovereigns. In addition, the Congress may “provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and Coin of the United States.” Thus, Money is Coin, Credit is the Promise to re-pay borrowed Money, and a Security is an instrument that embodies that promise in writing. Facially, this language establishes that Money, Credit and Securities are three separate and distinct entities and that the Congress allowing the Federal Reserve control over monetary policy is unconstitutional since the powers it delegated belong to the Congress.

At one time, a United States Note (security) was redeemable for gold or silver Money. This made the United States Note only a Security and not the Money to which the Constitution refers. Incrementally though, it did seem plausible to accept United States Notes as gold and silver since they were redeemable as such. However, since the gold standard was abolished by a combination of the Federal Reserve Act (delegated the creation of money and credit and the value thereof to the Federal Reserve Bank), the Coinage Act of 1965 (made Federal Reserve Notes, not US Notes legal Tender for all debts, public and private), and President Nixon’s Executive Order closing the Note- for-Bullion exchange at the Federal Reserve, the United States Note has been replaced with the Federal Reserve Note. Since this new Note is not backed by gold or silver there can be no reasonable presumption any longer that the States are using gold or silver as tender in payment of debt.

This loss of control over the creation of Money and Credit has had a profound effect upon the States making every transaction they engage in unconstitutional because Article I § 10 requires the States to accept and use only gold and silver in the payment and discharge of Debts. Thus, every time a state executes a transaction with Federal Reserve Notes…it is breaking the law!

The Congress must begin work to repeal the Federal Reserve Act and the Coinage Act of 1965 and return to gold and silver as our legal tender. There are hosts of investment reasons for us to return to the gold/silver standard and value backed currency, not the least of which is the fact that simply by saving their money, Americans could have been earning 18% per year on that savings since the Great Depression. Of course, the greatest reason is simply that United States Gold and Silver Eagle Bullion Coins are the only legal Tender that the Constitution allows making them the only legal currency in circulation.

Many detractors like to argue that returning to the gold/silver standard, after all this time using fiat currency, would be monumentally difficult and is therefore ridicules. They also like to point out that as the gold and silver prices move, so would have to move the prices of all goods and services. These arguments, not withstanding their illegality, would have held some validity at one time. However, in this modern age transactions in gold and silver are easier than ever! Nearly all transactions conducted by business today are done so through some kind of electronic medium. Software could be written that would allow point-of-sale registers to calculate the current prices for gold and silver in real time with the markets. Bank debit cards would turn into “gold access” cards that would allow the division of gold and silver, held in reserve, down to the smallest denominations electronically. Large denominations of gold and silver bullion would never even have to move. Should citizens want access to tradable units for non electronic face-to-face purchases they could purchase them from a local exchange simply by presenting their access card and having the digital money exchanged for physical money. In closing, there is no reason why we accept the current illegal monetary policy foisted upon us except that we simply have grown accustomed to the private “banksters” stealing our wealth with the support and approval of the Congress.

Deficit spending must immediately cease and all unconstitutional programs must be eliminated from the budget. All revenue, save that needed for the common defense, the general welfare, and certain entitlements now relied on for survival, should be re-directed to eliminate the national debt until it is repaid. The income tax on Americans should be eliminated and the sixteenth amendment repealed since the war it was intended to fund ended in 1919. Corporate income tax rates should be reset at 10% across the board. Excises, imposts, and duties should be adjusted so as to be able to pay for the National Infrastructure required for interstate trade and the Naval Forces required to protect the import/export of our goods and services. These adjustments would cause an explosion of wealth and growth in our economy the likes of which has not been seen in anyone’s lifetime. If all illegal spending ended, the considerable revenue generated by the aforementioned explosive economic growth would more than provide the nation with the funds needed for it to function.

To repay the debt we have allowed our Congress to accumulate, every citizen owes $34,778.50. Soon, interest payments on this debt will exceed tax revenues. Article I § 8 of the Constitution states “…Congress shall have the Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States;…” According to this, the United States may only go into debt or raise taxes providing for the common Defense or general Welfare. Additionally, even if there are legitimate expenditures that may be justified, budgetary constraints are supposed to force a prioritization process upon Congressional spending. However, to get around these legal and economical limitations the Congress has devised a new tax, which is not ever referred to as such but is otherwise known as deficit spending.

The Congress deficit spends when it does not have enough tax revenue for all the expenditures it wants. Deficit spending requires the creation of new Currency in the form of Federal Reserve Notes. This new currency dilutes that which is already in circulation, which in turn results in the loss of value of that circulating currency. The end result is an inflationary cycle which slowly destroys the value of our collective savings and requires investment in “ponzi schemes” to generate inflated gains simply to keep up with inflation. Compared to gold and silver Money, inflation has been and always will be relatively flat.

This deficit spending behavior is allowed by the tyranny of the majority and their ability to vote themselves, and their States, Money from the Treasury. Sadly, I cannot ascribe this spending to out-of-control democrats in the federal government because—shamefully—the previous Republican ran government outspent the Clinton administration by a 3:1 ratio. Providing for the general Welfare requires prioritization, which takes into account how much the country actually has to spend on such things. However, rather than be bound by this natural restriction, the Federal Government spends far more than the humble authorizations given to it in the Constitution.

An independent Auditor should be appointed to make a report on all the illegal and un-constitutional expenditures currently being allowed by the Congress and any that are found should be immediately discontinued or slowly eliminated. I say slowly eliminated because some entitlements have become relied upon for survival by large segments of the population. However, even these should be ended at a certain point and the young required to begin their own savings/investment retirement plans administered by the market.

The Congress should immediately stop interfering with the internal commerce functions of the States. Additionally the Congress should pass an amendment, and send it out to the States for Ratification, overruling the Supreme Courts interpretations of the Commerce Clause. Additionally, the Congress should immediately stop all expenditures for private company bailouts and allow defunct corporations, including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to fail. There is convincing evidence that the current financial and economic crisis was caused by the socialist manipulation of these two entities by key Congressional Regulatory and oversight bodies. Independent Counsels should be appointed to investigate these allegations immediately. The specter of failure is what keeps companies honest and encourages them to make good decisions.

The only powers the Constitution gives the Congress to regulate the economy is the Congress’ power over Duties, Imposts, Excises, and regulating commerce with Foreign Nations, Indian Tribes, and among the several States. This last is important because the Federal Government was to be an arbiter between the States regarding commerce to ensure that they dealt fairly with one another and that actions by any one State would not be allowed to disturb the economies of the others or the Country as a whole. The text does not facially allow the Congress to meddle in the internal commercial affairs of a Sovereign State. The Supreme Court has disagreed with this assessment and has, for a long time, given Congress over-wide latitude in the use of the Commerce Clause as a regulatory instrument upon the States. The Congress may override the Supreme Court’s extension of this super-constitutional power with the passage of an amendment that requires a return to the original intent of the Commerce Clause.

That being said, and preserving liberty being one of the primary functions of government, it does however fall to the government to ensure that the free market remain protected. This is because free markets are required for liberty to exist and flourish. Liberty requires that citizens be able to make the choices that are best for them and free markets allow them to make those choices. Therefore, the Congress should actively prevent the formation of monopolies, cartels, oligarchies, and other market manipulations. This regulatory function is contained within the Commerce Clause, but our Congress has been neglectful enforcing it of late. Giant corporations have been, and still are, allowed to form through mergers and acquisitions, which have resulted in the current climate of “companies that are too big to fail.” Through anti-trust regulation, and for the preservation of liberty through the protection of free markets, no company should ever be allowed to become “too big to fail.” Lastly, it should be self-evident that bailing out private companies with taxpayer Money is not an expenditure for the general Welfare.

Secure, by the consent of the governed, their rights to life, liberty, and property.

Without government, we would shoulder the constant burden of our own self-defense and preservation of our accumulated property. These burdens are beyond the constant vigilance of the individual. We must, therefore, give up just enough liberty to effect the formation of government for the purpose of securing these liberties; life and property. With the need for government established, we must reason its proper size and function; as our founders did. Only humans were created to reason. Pursuing reason requires liberty. It follows then that the Creator intended that humans be free and that governments established among them protect that liberty above all else. Our founders interpreted the proper role of government to be one that “establishes Justice, insures domestic Tranquility, provide(s) for the common defense, promote(s) the general Welfare, and secure(s) the Blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our Posterity…” Thus, a properly established and functioning government will protect its citizens right to life and property to the maximum while infringing upon their liberty to the minimum.